|
Questioning Carbon Capture and Storage: the fossil fuel industry's Holy Grail
Carbon dioxide is present in the atmosphere at very low levels as a result of cellular respiration of animals and the weathering of carbon-containing minerals (carbonates) such as limestone. The air outside contains on average 380 parts per million (ppm) (.038%), a rise of approximately 100 ppm in the last 200 years. Carbon dioxide molecules trap heat, which is why C02 is considered a greenhouse gas. The rising level of C02 caused by the burning of fossil fuels after the industrial revolution is believed to be the principle cause of climate change, and particularly global warming. Plants absorb CO2 and convert it to simple sugars and oxygen through photosynthesis. This is why deforestation is also considered a cause of global warming because is reduces the earth’s capacity to remove C02 from the atmosphere. The carbon captured by plants ends up in living tissue, bones, shells, soils, sedimentary rock, and of course “fossil fuels” such as coal and oil which all can be traced back to plants. C02 becomes toxic to life as it becomes more concentrated. Effects on human health are well documented after concentrations above 2%, and likely effects such as drowsiness are experienced at levels below this. Because C02 displaces oxygen and is heavier than oxygen, it “pools” in places such as underground storage areas in barns or tanks used for storing waste. Many people have succumbed to C02 gas when entering one of these potential death traps. C02 is odourless meaning that detection of this hazard by smell for example (as is the case is hydrogen sulphide), is not possible. There are several other hazards associated with the transportation and storage of concentrated C02 that should cause us to pause when considering how to dispose of the “captured” gas from these processes such as its violent reaction when exposed to air. The viability of carbon capture and storage is still unproven. As it is currently understood and practiced, CCS is extremely costly and could double the cost of energy. The safe storage of the C02 is fraught with many concerns and problems associated with safety and risk. Despite these concerns, the recent federal budget, supported by rhetoric from our political leaders, includes a massive investment in CCS. In fact the government had the audacity to consider this investment as a major plank in their “green” platform. Since these are our tax dollars and this is our planet, as a society we must scrutinize these types of investments and consider whether they truly are in our best interest. Massive public funds going toward carbon capture and storage obstructs the conversion of our economy to one that is ecologically sustainable by diverting public investment from technologies such as solar, geothermal and wind that do not entail the same risks, and which directly address climate change, the greatest environmental challenge facing humanity. Comments: Over at the Christian Science Monitor, there is an article about organic no-till farming methods and carbon sequestering. http://features.csmonitor.com/environment/2009/03/12/new-way-to-farm-boosts-climate-too/ Comments: Though your comment takes this discussion in a different direction, it does bring up how integrated everything is. Farming uses oil based products big time. Moving toward no-till organic farming is a great idea, but sounds very challenging for certain types of crops. Never-the-less the CSM article makes it clear that the exact timing of seeding in relation to knocking down the cover crop is one thing that influences the outcome which can be very positive. Modern industrialized agriculture uses large amounts of fertilizer and also pesticides, the latter of which often uses oil as one of the raw materials. Farming technics that reduce or elimate the need for pesticides, and the amount of tilling, are great for the environment because they use less fossil fuels. Unfortunately the huge agro-chemical companies and seed companies are so integrated and have such a strangle-hold on farmers (including the culture) that it is extremely challenging to switch away to a different modus operandi. There certainly are some heroic stories out there though. All most of us can do as consumers is buy local, and buy organic as much as possible. Comments: Great article and comments. I totally agree that the tar-sands project is terrible for the environment and the long term environmental costs far outway the short term financial gains. Who will pay for the clean up when it is all said and done? It will cost far more to clean up the mess than what little economic gain we get from it in the short term. Carbon capture is just the latest buzz word pretending to do something good for the environment. I am an engineer and the challenges and costs involved in making this work cost effectively is just not in the cards. The fact that we use one barrel of energy to produce two barrels of oil is just crazy and then what do we do with this amazing energy source? Most of it will be used to make throw away plastics and fuel for inefficient & polluting vehicles. If we were to use it to make wind turbines or solar panels, electric trains, etc. Then I could see a tangible long term benefit, but this is not the case. I would like to point out another problem that humanity is about to face and it is not global warming, however equally critical and related to Tarsand - Peak Oil. Comments: I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often. Google: fossil fuels Questioning Carbon Capture and Storage: the fossil fuel industry's Holy Grail oil |
›› A Fossil-fuel Free Sweden by 2020? - Pri
›› Fossil fuels' dise oversold - Boring fac
›› Ponca Casey Camp-Horinek at UN: Fossil f
›› Chris Nelder, "The End of Fossil Fuel"
›› Meet Smokey, the fossil fuels mascot
›› Saudi Oil Boss Says World Needs Fossil F
›› Colleges & Universities Make Progress in
›› Fossil fuels are not yet extinct, says S
›› Global Warming 2.0: Evidence Suggests Fo
›› Traffic hydrocarbons linked to lower IQs
›› Can Hydrocarbons Form Deep in the Earth
›› Hydrocarbons in the deep Earth?
›› A Fossil-fuel Free Sweden by 2020? - Pri
›› Questioning Carbon Capture and Storage:
›› Fossil fuels' dise oversold - Boring fac
›› Ponca Casey Camp-Horinek at UN: Fossil f
›› Chris Nelder, "The End of Fossil Fuel"
›› Meet Smokey, the fossil fuels mascot
›› Saudi Oil Boss Says World Needs Fossil F
›› Venezuela takes its oil fields
›› What is that wedsite that has dog food r
›› Tied and Tortured
›› Stimulation...Simplified
›› A hunt For Obama Daughters' Hypoallergen
›› fast food discount coupons
›› Sherina, smoke on the water !
›› Fiddy did not make $400 million on Vitam
›› Rachael's New 2 YR Deal
›› 1981 Mercury 7.5hp Outboard Engine: Fuel
›› Turn off the Tap, Snow Mountain is Back!
›› Making Sesame Oil The Old Way
You may find: